3 ms·

I don't like the moving goal posts in regards to disinformation especially about science. We've originally been told that we shouldn't consider to medical opin

by bko 5y ago

I don't like the moving goal posts in regards to disinformation especially about science. We've originally been told that we shouldn't consider to medical opinions of those that are not trained scientists. Fair enough. But you have someone credentialed that happens to say things that are critical of public policy, and suddenly he falls into that bucket. I would like an objective statement about what is and isn't allowed to be posted on a social media platform. It has to be equally applied to all. But it can't be "you're not allowed to say anything that could be seen to critique current public policy or [three letter organization]"

raffraffraff 5y ago
> We've originally been told that we shouldn't consider to medical opinions of those that are not trained scientists. Fair enough. I don't think it's fair enough. I like the Royal Society's motto: 'Nullius in verba' (meaning 'take nobody's word for it'). Look at the quality of the study, the data, and the statistical results instead of taking someone's word because they are "a scientist". I think that if a lay-person can use the Cochrane library, understand what they are reading, and retains a solid grasp of the meta-analysis of the trials, then I'll take their opinion on a subject as quickly as that of "some scientist" who has been pedaling debunked theories.